Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    July 26, 2011 9:00am-9:30am PDT

9:00 am
a lot of the money we make it goes right back to our neighborhood. we eat lunch in our neighborhood. we eat dinner at our neighborhood and refer customers to local restaurants, coffee shops and even other stores if we do not have the product. the number -- the money stays in our store -- in our neighborhood. handful of customers who came and congratulate me on the store and ask for advice on how to open a small business because they were interested in doing it but there are too afraid to. it would be a shame of competitors come that i have to close -- all of these people who want to be small business owners would stop their pursuit because all these big stores come in. [tone] >> good afternoon, supervisors.
9:01 am
i own a small business in washington at i would like to emphasize the crux which was presented by jonathan at pets' corner as a classic example of the odds of real spirit coming into the city trying to establish a small business of making a go of it. we have businesses of formula retail stores coming into the city that will kill the spirit of entrepreneurship. it is a question that needs to be addressed. if you have these megastore is coming in, the sole individual who wants to establish a small business that creates the identity of the city is very crucial. it needs to be weighed very carefully to. were you want to take the city and how we differentiate yourself from the suburban areas? when the stores, italy, if they
9:02 am
establish themselves in in different localities, which we call triangulation, they use their store to pat down any of entrepreneurial spirit. it is not good for the city and i would appreciate this legislation to pass. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i have petitions fromb &b pet stores and i would like to mention -- we had these copies made at north beach coffee shop. it's a very small business and they made it the copies for free. they did not charge for any for all the supervisors copies for tomorrow also.
9:03 am
that says a lot about small business. but i like to talk about the sign petitions you have in your hand. fothese are signatures from richmond residents that patronize pasteur's in this corridor. there is a very clear message being sent by residents throughout the city that within two years, there are signed petitions in three different arab districts totaling 10,000 signatures who are against big box pat stores. please support this legislation. thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm one of the co-owners of best in show pet supply. i would like to read and e-mail
9:04 am
sent for one of my colleagues it says the dear supervisor, i am writing about the vote coming against the petco coming into the community. in the interest of keeping your attention, i will choose one. remember the great meg ryan movie, were you rooting for her bookstore to stay open? tom hanks was arguing his big bookstore would not put her out of business, but of course it did. i and my partner live in constant trepidation that this will someday be our fate. i understand that everyone wants to see a large space on a big avenue rented out, but when the space is leased by a large chain that competes with small independents, i believe everyone loses. the ripple effect the big box
9:05 am
score has into smaller neighborhood affects the character of those neighborhoods. cesar chavez is similar in that is why, loud and does not have much personality. i could see why supervisors would not give much thought into which big business is complete. but the nearby neighborhoods and no longer have an independent pharmacy, small office supply shop, or in the case of 24 street, are in danger of losing its only family-owned hardware store. if a nationwide pet store or bookstore chain came in, that would be it for us. i've seen it happen in manhattan. the neighborhoods take on a bland repetitiveness and you could be anywhere. people come to san francisco because they find businesses that are not the same cookie cutter thing everywhere they go. i am -- [tone] supervisor mar: thank you.
9:06 am
>> good afternoon, supervisors. i own bow wow meow. i'm here in support of this legislation. i think it's a step in the right direction. while we are mostly talking about the fiscal impact on the small retailers, you have to understand there's a bigger impact. while some types of small businesses have disappeared, the pet category is one where small independents exist. we answer to the community, not shareholders. we cannot strive to have our name of ballparks, we strive to make an honest living and support our staff and community. to understand the impatience with a big box that store moving and to san francisco, i have an e-mail i received today. i told this person i would it
9:07 am
carry their small product in my store. anytime someone introduce a product like try to support their business and we helped to stimulate the local economy. i carry 22 lines manufactured in the bay area, nine of which are made in san francisco. these are all small businesses that would not be picked up by big box stores. i advertise locally, use of accountants, printers, and on and on. it's all handled here and we create jobs locally in all kinds of ways. the big chains cannot be part of a community the same way small local merchant can. in the long run, it will hurt the city of san francisco to let chain stores in. no doubt that when they come in, other categories nobody in visit -- nobody imagined the closing of the stationery stores, hardware stores and bookstores. i support the legislation. it is best for the city of san francisco. supervisor mar: thank you.
9:08 am
>> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm here on behalf of petco. i want to emphasize the point we've been making threats this entire process and that is the legal basis. the california supreme court was very clear in its case saying that while cities have a very broad powers to enact the zoning ordinances, that it is illegitimate to enact an ordinance with a direct primary purpose, anti-competitive purpose that favors or disfavors one business or another. throughout this process, it has been shown that the ordinance does exactly that. we submitted our application for the petco in mid february. this ordinance came out a couple of months later and throughout the process, statements from the public and public officials have all been recognizing that the purpose of this is to stop pet
9:09 am
co, and this ordinance expressly applies to applications currently on file. just to point out the direct focus of this, if petco were to file an application after this ordinances passed, they could open a store one block north. that goes to show how narrowly focused this ordinances on this one pet store. i also want to make the point that we're not here today asking for an approval of the store. all we're asking for is to go through the conditional release process like every other project applicant has the right to do in this city. we urge you to not support this ordinance. supervisor mar: thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm speaking on behalf of petco. i just want to remind the
9:10 am
committee that we are talking about a ban, a prohibition that live in perpetuity, long beyond the life of this supervises board and potentially beyond the life of any of the current small business that supplies stores that happen to be in the neighborhood today. we're not talking about petco's application. there is a very hearty process in san francisco that i believe provides plenty of hurdles for a company like petco or any similar co. and provides plenty of opportunity for the board to either approve or reject those applications on a case by case basis. the process, as it stands today, allows the most flexibility and most responsiveness for the boards to truly hear what the community wants at the time of the application and i think it prohibition would stifle that
9:11 am
flexibility and 20 to consider the planning commission's recommendation to reject -- and i want you to consider the planning commission's recommendation to reject at least the pet supplies condition of this. supervisor mar: is there anyone else who like to speak, please come forward. >> i am not here today as a land-use attorney, but as the owner -- the part owner of a pet supply store on fillmore street. i think this legislation begins to address the mix of use and our neighbor and commercial districts and what makes a neighbor and commercial district viable and vibrant. small business, such as the pet store owner and myself, we have the kind of personal
9:12 am
relationship, we are an integral part of the community. if you look back in san francisco and see what happens when walgreen's came in, it is very difficult for any of us now to go into any neighborhood and fine and independent pharmacy. they are in medical office buildings, but they no longer are on fillmore street. they are gone. they are just no longer there. same thing for hardware stores. the legislation your beginning to look at is beginning to address not the character we want in this city, the kind of uses we want in this city and the kind of businesses that have the personal relationship. when our customers grow old, we monitor them. we offer to go out and deliver
9:13 am
them their food for the animals for free. when they do not show up or call over a certain time when we know they should be coming in, we call to find out if they are ok. something happened to them. we go and try to please the animals. [tone] the relationship of baseball business like ours is very different from a big box and i support the legislation. supervisor mar: thank you. seeing no other comments, let's close public comment. colleagues, i will say it has been a learning process discussing with some unease all business leaders and community residents on this issue. we are not targeting any businesses through this legislation. we're just supporting a more livable community. i think she just hit it on the head -- what makes a merchant corridor or community viable and vibrant?
9:14 am
i think it is small businesses, unique ones that know every dog and cat by name and the customers and know their particular needs and can cater to those and not suburban strip mall formula retail stores. our legislation is focused primarily on revitalizing the geary boulevard corridor and the richmond district in an outer and zoning controls to fill vacant spaces more easily as the economy is hurting everyone right now. i strongly urge your support and i know supervisor wiener said he would be support allowing this to go forward with our recommendation but i strongly urge moving this forward with a recommendation today and thank you, everyone for coming to speak and appreciate the process we have gone through to bring this for today. are there other comments or questions? supervisor wiener: i would like to thank everyone for coming out
9:15 am
today and have an opportunity -- i have had an opportunity to sit down with folks on friday and i will repeat what i said last week. not only do i shoped at best in show for my animal, but i don't just talk about supporting small businesses and neighborhoods against over encroachment by chains. when i was president of my neighborhood association before taking this current job, i helped lead the charge to keep chased from opening a second bank in the castro and keep walgreen's from opening its fifth store front in the castro. we went to the planning commission and made our case for how these would degrade and undermine part of the castro. and we won. we went through the conditional use process and it worked.
9:16 am
when levi's came into the castro, we went down to the planning commission and said this is a good thing for the neighborhood and levi's came in and it added to the neighborhood. this is not about whether we like chains or don't like change or whether we support small business or don't support small business. this is about whether we're going to best achieve making our neighborhoods economically and culturally vibrant by putting in a blanket ban or by having a conditional use process that allows neighborhoods to decide if this particular chain store in this particular location is going to be beneficial or detrimental. when it is bad -- when it is beneficial, it should come in and go to the process and prevail and when it's detrimental, it should get knocked out of the planning commission. if not then, by this board. i have every confidence when i see these petitions, i assume
9:17 am
this will be submitted to the planning commission and if i were petco, i would be trembling in my boots to see something like this. i know it will get appealed to this board if it gets approved by the planning commission. we have a process i continue to support and it works and with all respect to the chairman, and i do respect the fact that you are responding to your neighborhood and their needs, i totally respect that. but i respectfully disagree and cannot support this legislation. thank you. supervisor mar: thank you. thank you for your comments and can i just urge us -- i will move that we move this forward with a recommendation to the full board as a committee report for july 26th, 2011. can we have a role call? >> on the motion to refer this
9:18 am
recommended as a committee report -- [roll-call] mr. scher, we have 2ayes and one no. how item #8 -- treating it limited live performance permit and specifying license fees and hearing requirements. supervisor mar: supervisor mirkarimi is here, the author. >> as you know, we held over this legislation because of some modest amendments we made last week here in this committee and do to process the required us to hold over this legislation. i would like to think supervisors wiener, mar and
9:19 am
campos. there has been an incredible groundswell of support throughout all sectors of san francisco from mom-and-pop restaurants, small restaurants, cafes, who are looking for as much assistance in getting a leg up, especially as san francisco likes of the other cities has tried to traverse the economic downturn that has engulfed this country and the state. musicians and performance artists are looking for some opportunity that had not been created before that might give them a leg up as well. we think with this legislation, we might be able to create some synergistic response that helps the sizable orbit of cafes and restaurants to be able to obtain a permit where the curb -- current system had been very
9:20 am
cost prohibitive because it's a one size fits all permit which could cap over $2,000 in a year. usually for the larger facilities, the larger venues that would allow for entertainment. in this case, we're trying to create another tear for smaller than you permits and that falls into line with what some of the other cities in the united states and abroad who have a reputation in being much more vibrant and lively and being able to support the arts and artists and create a merchant seaman, a small business merchant seen -- where people live in those cities get to see a level of activity whereas in san francisco, that activity does not exist. when you hear about the progress in the city of austin, texas or your about chicago and
9:21 am
new york city, which is legendary or seattle and boston, they are way ahead of us in being able to create the land use conditions not discouraging but inviting this level of activity. san francisco should be right in line in competing not just with the cities, but with the perception when people come here and see that we could be more vibrant than we are. creating this new tier with the help of our small business commission, which unanimously passed with recommendation the advancement of this legislation, the planning commission also unanimously -- overwhelming support that did this legislation and initially, we had also carved out a couple of areas in the city not already
9:22 am
covered in the previous permitting system. i left it to the constituents, the merchants and supervisors, our colleagues, to decide in the south of market area, should they want to be opted into this law and the process, grass roots -- i think well organized and arrived at the idea that they want to opt into this process. now we have a thorough piece of law with some of the suggestions that had been mentioned earlier in last week's meeting and previously. i think it is ready now to be advanced to the four -- to the full board of supervisors. i talked to it -- i talked to the chief yesterday and i talk to the inspector from the police apartment today who likes this legislation -- the police department today, who likes this legislation. i wanted to make sure there were clear on all the concepts of the
9:23 am
legislation and they are. if i have to come outside of committee, more than happy to delay it by one week. i with a recommendation today. i would like to thank planning and small business and the fleet of proponents for this law and people who have really helped try to refine it as much as possible. i have nothing further to add except i know there might be some public comment. supervisor wiener: thank you, and i want to thank supervisors mirkarimi for taking leadership on this. it is extremely important in the department as well. for those of us who care deeply about making our neighborhoods and nightlife and a life as well as vibrant as possible, this is an important step that sends a
9:24 am
loud message that we are committed to allowing music and entertainment in our neighborhoods and not requiring that mom or pop cafe or small restaurant will have to go through the conditional use process and place of entertainment process. the other processes that are so daunting to anyone who does not have deep pockets and maybe a year or two to spend waiting. this is very important. i just want to note two things -- one is i -- if i could wave my magic wand and just control everything, which i know i cannot -- supervisor mirkarimi: but you are trying. [laughter] supervisor wiener: i try really hard. i have a 50/50 success rate. i would love to see the western soma included. i did not like the idea of exempting neighborhoods and including all these opt outs.
9:25 am
if we have a good city-wide policy, it should be city-wide, unless there is an extraordinarily good reason for a sending an area, which i not believe has been shown here. from what i can tell so far, i am on the losing end. if that happens between now and tuesday, then that is awesome, and i'm going to be totally supportive of that, but i'm going to support the legislation whether or not that change is made. we also talked last week about adding digital and analog into this, and i am very supportive of doing that. i also want to be mindful of getting this passed and not having unnecessary delays. again, whether we do that now or as for the legislation, i do want to do it, and i will support the legislation regardless. supervisor mar: thank you. i think we have at least one speaker card. supervisor mirkarimi: yes, we do.
9:26 am
i just have one speaker card, but anyone else would like to speak, please do so. supervisor mar: two minutes per person. >> good afternoon, supervisors. i sent you a letter this morning, and i hope you have that. we have attended to engage in discussion as residents are around the commercial district -- of the commercial district, i should say, because there are many in our area. with specific concerns, which are outlined in the letter. specifically, they relate to the public notice process. fundamentally posting notices in the window is something that frequently does not work because frequently it does not happen. and i want to make a very key point here. we are not talking about most of the small businesses. it is like muni. you get 5% or 1% who are really bad, and they'd make it a misery for everyone around them, and we do not have controls to address
9:27 am
that. the noise language that has been introduced is excellent. the problem is that the enforcement does not exist. when this was raised, we are talking about what the controls should be. we are not going to worry about enforcement. and i find that troubling because if there was adequate enforcement, i believe there would be no objection to this. i think everyone i have talked to absolutely supports the basic concept. the problem is you move into the neighborhood commercial districts, you move and to performance venues, below residences -- these buildings are not built with appropriate soundproofing. we do not have controls. i think there are easy ways to address that issue. it would be wonderful if we actually took the time to discuss the issue with the entertainment commission, with the police enforcement folks on noise, who have made it clear they cannot respond within a
9:28 am
half-hour or an hour. maybe two hours if we are lucky. and when do people call? 9:30, 10:00. when do they show up? 12:00. guess what? they start for -- to stop performing it 10:00. we would really like to work with appropriate parties to craft improvements so controls are in place so the neighbors are not worried about it. thank you. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you, sir. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. i am the president of the california music and culture association. we enthusiastically welcome and applaud this legislation. i think this will create a number of opportunities for musicians and artists to find other avenues to continue their craft, to showcase their craft. i think this will also add an added benefit to the restaurants and cafes that want to add
9:29 am
something additional to attract their guests. we also would like to see the inclusion of analog and digital forms of entertainment. i believe that in this day and age, it is difficult to differentiate as technology improves. however, in the interests of seeing this legislation move forward, we also support what was said earlier, to add that in trailing legislation. additionally, we would like to see you go citywide. supervisor mirkarimi: thank you. next speaker please. >> hello, commissioners. i have been a north beach resident for 20 years. i love my neighborhood. i love my neighborhood. i love the vibrant nightlife